Quote:
If something works for you and your customers are happy with the quality of your finished product, that's all that matters. I'm not selling the product, I'm just throwing it out there for anyone who is interested. |
Actually the Comer 900 light is a cheaper alternative. It's smaller and lighter. the light output is also significantly better than the Canon VL-10, LP Micro, and SWIT/Varisoom light too.
You can check out these clips YouTube - 6 On-Camera Video Lights Shootout - Test #2 Medium Size Room YouTube - Comer CM-LBPS900 LED Light |
Well Taky, I'm looking forward to receiving my Comer 900.
To all, I switched to the 900 strictly for weight reasons, but am confident the light will work fine even if not as strong as the 1800. Thanks for the excellent customer service Taky, you're the best! |
Jeff, Do you think that you will see a big difference between the Sony 10/20 (800 lux, $90) and the Comer 900 (900 lux,$280)?
Stelios |
I do. I'll actually set up the light next to the sony and take photographs with my Canon 40d and we'll see exactly. I could be wrong, but I expect much better results with the Comer based on Taky's videos.
I'll keep you posted. |
If what Taky said is true, the 900 should be better than my Swit and the Swit is certainly better than the Sony 10/20.
Stelios, you can't keep comparing the lux of the 10/20 to the other lights. It's not comparing apples to apples. I can duct tape a flashlight to the top of my camera and that would probably put out more watts and be cheaper as well. |
I used to have the SWIT light. So I compared it side by side with the Canon VL3, VL10, LP Micro, Comer 900 and Comer 1800.
Comer 900 is brighter and wider spread than SWIT. You can watch this video YouTube - 6 On-Camera Video Lights Shootout - Test #1 Small Room |
Yes, the video is pretty thorough.
|
Quote:
Ofcourse I might be wrong. Jeff when you get the Comer 900 please do a comparison with your Sony 10/20 ( I presume you have one) and post the results. Stelios |
Quote:
http://www.amazon.com/Sony-HVL-20DW2.../ref=pd_cp_p_1 In the page, it said the light is 40 lux and 80 lux ONLY. Not 400 lux and 800 lux. It doesn't say the measuring distance too. So for the Sony light at the strongest dual light mode assumed at 1 meter, the difference is 80 lux for Sony and 900 lux compared to the Comer 900 light. |
I look at the spread also, and the Sony has none.
The Comer has a wider dispersion and other features, the Sony offers nothing except a narrow beam of light. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Testing is at 5 feet in complete darkness. The Sony (turned sideways for maximum coverage and no diffuser) at its brightest spot is 110 lux. Move a foot from side to side and it drops to approx 65 lux. The Swit was 76 lux (using the diffuser) at its brightest spot and dropped to 58 lux moving it a foot side to side. The Comer was 290 lux (without any filter) and dropped to 258 at 1 foot. Here is the kicker, the Comer still had 167 lux at 3 feet from its brightest spot. With the filter it dropped to about 198 lux and was about 168 lux at a foot and 112 lux at 3 feet. Also, the Sony did not fill in the picture on my LCD. The lighting on the sides was unacceptable. I didn't even bother testing 3 feet away from the brightest point. I did this with my camera, tripod, lights and Greenlee Digital Light Meter. Hope this helps.
Taky, at 1 meter I got 835 Lux. |
Just to keep everything as accurate as possible, I would give a +/- of 9 lux.
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:08 AM. |
DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2024 The Digital Video Information Network